Campbell v. Polk’s Empirical Analysis
447 F.3d 270 · 2006
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently November 2023
6 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Brady v. State of Maryland · Williams v. Taylor · United States v. Bagley · Teague v. Lane
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“When a fragmented Court decides a case and no single rationale explaining the result enjoys the assent of five Justices, the holding of the Court may be viewed as that position taken by those Members who concurred in the judgments on the narrowest grounds.” Campbell v. Polk, 447 F.3d 270, 290 (4th Cir.2006) (quoting Marks v. United States, 430 U.S. 188 , 193, 97 S.Ct. 990 , 51 L.Ed.2d 260 (1977)). . On June 20, 2016, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Jennings v. Rodriguez. See - U.S. -, 136 S. Ct. 2489 , 195 L.Ed.2d 821 (June 20, 2016) (No. 15-1204) on (1)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Jarpa v. Mumford“relief is foreclosed by [the defendant]'s failure to request a parole ineligibility instruction at trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“); Townes v. Murray , 68 F.3d 840 , 850 (4th Cir. 1995) (”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.